*My response is in red

Joanne Pilchesky wrote:

---

His Girl Thursday wrote:

---

I am just getting around to reading her replies and I have this to say. We asked you a question which you have pu$$yfooted around for about a week and finally came out with maybe "a dozen". Thank you for agreeing with what we already knew.

No, that's a false statement. I said dozens. I admitted what I knew/know at the time.

I did see where you said dozens.  But might I ask this and I know you don't think that I have a right to ask but I am going to just the same ...Do you think that it is right that Joe dupes the membership of DD into thinking that the membership is more than it actually is?  Do you think it's right that Joe asked questions and then signed on using another name to answer that same question under the pretense that he is someone else?  Do you think that it is right that Joe puts out threats to himself to garner sympathy from the minions?  I don't think it is right ... perhaps if he were be upfront and honest about it and not stirring the pot to see how much he can make it stink ... but he is not.

That being said, where do YOU get off questioning OUR methods of asking for information verification?

You may have misunderstood the discussion. I don't question anything that you do here in terms of trying to change your methods. It's your choice(s).

You are right Joann it is a choice that we who started PD together (myself and the moderators) have made and we do enforce ... as I said in another post you know we enforce that as your were posting with the same IP for Edith and Grammy.  I am just assuming that you were using both as you never corrected me on this.

Let's put this in some context. Call Pat McKenna at the Times Tribune and ask him to prove some of the statements in his articles. See how long you can keep him on the phone!

We have not contacted Pat McKenna ... however we were in contact and he was a poster here at one time ... with Stacy Brown ... we questioned him on things ... I thought you all were boycotting the Times ... for people who are boycotting something you sure do know an awful lot about what they print on a daily basis.

However, if you're going to question my methods, then your methods must be questioned also. I'm not interested in how you manage this site. And, I'm not nterested in proving anything to you. I am committed to protecting the hundreds of other members on my site in the most practical and equitable way I can. Joe will be harvested out.

I am very interested in how you manage your site as I was banned for simply presenting the true an honest facts ... which if asked at the time I would have told you who I am and how I knew and given proof of it ... but I was simply banned from DD for being a free thinker which is something that was never encouraged across the hall in the past.  I am glad to know that all of Joe's name will be harvested out.

And since you asked I have used a total of three names here at PD ... LusNewVoice, Voice of Reason, and LusOnlyVoice.  The reason I had to change it up was that your posters at DD were using the same names and making it look as though I was posting things in agreement with Joe.  But those are the names that I have used here and they are still active names but you can go to the member list and see the last time they were ever used.  I should delete them.

His online multi-personalities were the first question asked of you (after Lus offered her condolences to your situation).

Do you believe that if anyone asked you on this board if any of you have multi-personalities that you would tell them the truth, AND provide proof? C'mon, you're a member of the modern generation, and you damn well know that in situations like this, there is never any concrete proof.

I have shared the user names that I have used over the past 5 1/2 years ... there have been three but I never post with more than one name and the name that I use always carries the title of site administrator so I have nothing to hide.

At least we ask for verification when the opportunity presents itself. Over at the cuckoo's nest, you throw a bleeding animal into the rumor mill, thrash it around for a week or so, whip the patients into a frenzy and THEN say, oh, well, we'd better slap some fact into this ... just because.

And who exactly are you referring to as 'you'? Can you provide proof to your bleeding animal claims?

I think that when the word "you" is used it refers to the posters at the DD site collectively ... and when Girl talks of the bleeding animal that you throw around ... one example is blaming Sammy Vitris for the death of a small child in a house fire in Scranton West Side ... that was not right an you all know it.  Blaming the Mayor for a suicide ... not right and you know it ... there are many examples ... how about when you all discussed Bob McGoffs daughter ... not right ... you held Judy Gatelli to a higher standard when you all bitched about her daughter getting a teaching job ... but hey Janet Evans son is a teacher at West High and you all had no problem with that ... and that is what we call a DD double standard.  If you all like someone they can do what ever the hell they want but if you don't like them well ... you are out for blood across the hall.

And give you our banned dd usernames and you'll un-ban them?? I don't think so. Nice try.

---

When we fought Gatelli about identifying anonymous posters on the internet, the case law and research was phenomenally overwhelming, that, even to the presentation of subpoenaed evidence and testimony in some of the highest courts in this country..(eventually Supreme Court) regarding IP addresses, email addresses and user names, it was unilaterally impossible to prove that anyone was anyone else.

There will come a day when you can't hide under the guise of free speech when you spew the evil things that you put up about people across the hall.  Cyberbullying is no joke and that is what your site does best.

This isn't really a pussyfoot response, it's a fact in the electronic world. You know it. I'm not obligated, nor will I, publish a list of user names of people who I believe have more than one identity. What if I make a mistaken identification and an innocent member is exposed?

I don't think anyone wants you to publish a list ... so get off that high horse.

Part of how I look at the site is as an online news exchange mixed in with opinions, submitted by contributing reporters. If you can show any information to be false, then post that response. Other than the issue of Joe's meglomania and how it manifests itself, what's the problem here...really????

How is rumor and innuendo deemed news?  You provide no proof ... never have and obviously never will ... The problem is that your site hurts innocent people who are not public figures ... you can hate the politics but do you really have to slam on the children of the public figures and the Grandchildren?  Really?????

Have you been so harmed that you need validation?

My friends have been harmed and when you harm my friends you in turn harm me when you will not let me stick up for them ... ban me and delete my posts ... yes you proclaim free speech for everyone and yet ... it was a lie ... a deceitful lie.  You may have started with the best of intentions but that is not how it ended up.

And, regarding your statement about being unbanned, if you talk to your admin here, you'll see that I need either an email address, a user name, or an IP in order to unban you.

This is true.  I can back her up on this.

I mistook statements on here to mean that members would like to post across the hall and I was trying to help.

I did think about it but then I thought that I would be better off not posting there because your membership would crucify me and any of the posters from this site.

You know that the cost and responsibility of liberty and free speech is a double edged sword. What one wants for themselves, they have a duty to provide for others.

I would say that is true if your site truly provided everyone with free speech but it does not.  It did not afford the freedom of speech to the posters who eventually ended up here ... with the exception of a few ... Glenn, Lynn Bloom, Shari Lewis and a few others.

 

---

 

His Girl Thursday wrote:

---

I am just getting around to reading her replies and I have this to say. We asked you a question which you have pu$$yfooted around for about a week and finally came out with maybe "a dozen". Thank you for agreeing with what we already knew.

---

Just curious...how does your typo occur for what is clearly 'dozens' to 'a dozen'? Maybe you really meant to say 'a dozens', huh?

Lighten up. Have fun tonight, but always be safe!

Best of the New Year to everyone.

Joanne Pilchesky wrote:

---

His Girl Thursday wrote:

---

I am just getting around to reading her replies and I have this to say. We asked you a question which you have pu$$yfooted around for about a week and finally came out with maybe "a dozen". Thank you for agreeing with what we already knew.

---

Just curious...how does your typo occur for what is clearly 'dozens' to 'a dozen'? Maybe you really meant to say 'a dozens', huh?

Lighten up. Have fun tonight, but always be safe!

Best of the New Year to everyone.

---

 How does it happen .. your kidding right ... you mean to type an s but you miss it ... happens a lot ...

Anyway hope you all had a wonderful night last night ... Happy New Year!

 

Which site are you talking about Glenn because I just quickly checked across the hall and well it may not have the hits in an hour that Joe had ... but more than 800 hits per hour does not sound like an old wounded elephant to me ... I guess time will tell.

"...old wounded elephant"?

 

Seriously?  More like a sickly, decrepid rat.

Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.

" ... Just curious...how does your typo occur for what is clearly 'dozens' to 'a dozen'? Maybe you really meant to say 'a dozens', huh? ..." Touche - and thanks for pointing out my literary ineptitude. I've no excuse and I'd have done the same to you given the opportunity. And my sincere apologies, I had no idea there were multiple usernames in use here. I've never been privvy to them. But I see Lus has taken care of that matter in the interim.

First, thanks Lus for taking my back when I couldn't finish my posting. As far as my 'bleeding animal' comment, I was headed toward the school director whose life and career were all but ruined by the bull$hit thrown across the hall because the guy had an affair. You (and all of dd) ripped that poor bastard up one side and down the other because of something you (and all of dd) knew absolutely nothing about. Hundreds upon hundreds of comments about his character, his job, his wife, his pecker and where he put it, you name it.

I believe that topic was one of the first (if not the very first) topic that got the big old $hit ball rolling over there. The guy, although certainly no angel, was dragged through the gutter, same for the chick he was bedding, and the wife and kids were mentioned (by name and probably age). Classy. And it just got more disgusting after that. You (and all of dd) took that frenzy and named names where names should not have been named. It would have been one thing if the guy blowing the whistle was a do-gooder bible thumper looking for the truth and justice, but you (and all of dd) were just looking to ransack, rape and pillage any person who looked at you sideways. You (and all of dd) were just looking for someone to trip up ... and if they didn't, you (AND ALL OF DD) invented something to harp on. Go ahead and deny it.

Now the tables have turned. Instead of dragging that filandering pilcheski through the mud and the chick he's sticking it to, the bastard is glorified and his scorned wife is laughed at and degraded because she is starting to see the light and stand up for what is right. Yeah, you go right ahead and stick up for them joanne. You would be better off walking away from the whole mess. him... the site ... and all the losers who used to call you friend, but now call you traitor because you're not at his (their) beck and call.

Open your own site. You might actually be able to do some good in your own right.

Girl .. I just wanted to let you know one thing ... the reason membership went down was not due to Multiple User Names ... although I did have three out there but I have already explained that in an earlier post ... I also went through and cleaned out User ID's that had not even visited the site in 2 or more years ... that's what brought our membership down. I had been meaning to do that for quite a while ... it's kind of like cleaning out the attic ... you mean to do it in order to keep things neat and orderly ... but even though your intentions are good you rarely find the time to actually get it done.

Here is the post that I was talking about it was all alone in another thread ... you probably didn't see it.

 

LusOnlyVoice Site Administrator Status: Online Posts: 4925 Date: Fri Dec 30 6:06 PM, 2011

Well Joanne I took your advice Reply Quote More Edit Post Delete Post Printer Friendly Ban IP Report Spam Joanne I took your advice and I practiced what I preach. I deleted the old user names that I used to use. While I was at it I deleted any members that have not logged into the site in more than 2 years ... now I have done it and I know it's alot easier to go through 97 names than it is to go through over 4,000 names but if you do a little bit each day it can be accomplished. There are absolutely no posters with duplicate names on this site ... and our membership was cut in half. But it needed to be cleaned up. To anyone who found they have been deleted just contact me and I will be more than happy to restore your accounts. __________________ I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet. Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.

There is nothing more a person can do than sincerly apologizing for the role they played in a wrong event.  I personally think you are sincere and I except your apology.